[OPE-L:8377] Re: Re: Re: Re: unproductive labour

From: clyder@gn.apc.org
Date: Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:37:16 EST

Quoting rakeshb@stanford.edu:
> Yes but capital must keep a tight lid on the wage demands of 
> those workers paid out of surplus value--unproductive, albeit 
> oppressed, workers as Carchedi puts it--if the reproduction of total 
> social capital is to yield  a positive uniform rate of profit across all 
> its sectors--industrial, commercial and financial. Capital pays to all 
> these workers--exploited productive and oppressed 
> unproductive--only that wage which allows for the reproduction of 
> labor power and the continuous expenditure of labor.  The unity of 
> the working class is thus founded on their wages (collectively and 
> individually) being driven to the reproduction costs of labor power. 
> Capital relies on this whether the workers are productive or 
> unproductive. 
> By your reasoning, productive laborers would have an interest in 
> driving the wages of unproductive labor below the value of its labor 
> power in order to prevent capital from having to do the same to 
> their own wages as a countertendency to FROP.  Or by your 
> reasoning productive labor should welcome the automation of 
> fnancial and circulation activity without any social insurance for the 
> technologically unemployed because such insurance would only 
> deprive capital of surplus value that  it will have to try to win back by 
> accentuating the exploitatoin of productive labor. 

This is an econmistic response. It is predicated on the 
continued existence of capitalism. What I am pointing out is that
a contradiction between private sector unproductive workers
and other workers is likely to come about when a socialist
government sets about abolishing the financial sector.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 24 2003 - 00:00:01 EST